"Let love be genuine. Abhor what is evil, hold fast to what is good. Love one another with brotherly affection; outdo one another in showing honor." Romans 12:9-10 (I think? lol)
Let's remember to have an attitude of humility and love here. :)
It creates a PDF that you print out, of basically the first letter of each word in the chapter, and organizes it into a grid pattern so it's easy to follow/remember.
I think that carrying this around with me for regular review is going to help a lot.
Just don't give up. The daily streak is a nice little thing to work towards, but it isn't the main goal here. I kept giving up after breaking a streak, and I wish I would have kept with it anyway. :) So now I'm back.
Being "found many more times" does not mean that the doctrine is weakened or not taught. We don't base our core doctrines off of a single verse, but on the whole counsel of God, the entire Bible.
A specific teaching may be included or removed from a specific verse, but that does not mean that the subject being taught is completely added or removed from the Bible as a whole.
As long as we remember that it is our opinion, and not scripture, so to speak. :)
One thing to remember, we are all servants of our Lord, Jesus Christ. We are all called to follow. But how each person follows is different, and unique. Every person has their own life experiences, their own temptations, and their own strengths.
So... We are all called to follow, but how each person follows is not up to us. They are servants of Christ, not servants of us to follow the way we think is best.
We are called to encourage one another, and to exhort a person to avoid sin when necessary, but not make each person follow exactly how we think is best. They are followers of Jesus. Let Him deal with them. Be an encouragement.
We need to be aware of our own biases when we go into conversations like this.
@Jappel said "Say that the KJV is the original, and that the ESV was the good, newer translation of the KJV. If it is "just" an upgrade into modern English as you say, FA, Why are things missing."
The biased assumption is that anything not in the ESV that is in KJV is "missing" in the ESV, rather than thinking through this without that bias, and maybe you would see that it *may not* be "missing" in the ESV, but "added" in the KJV.
I'm not concerned with how the NIV or the ESV compare to the KJV. I'm concerned with how each version compares to the original, as translated. Now we don't have the originals, but we do have hundreds of thousands of manuscript copies that we can compare to. They are the best thing that we have to figuring out what was in the original.
How does KJV compare to the best example that we can figure out of what was in the originals? It looks like things were added to it...
But, do any of these differences change any of the core doctrinal differences? Do they change any teaching, or are we only arguing over what few words are the most accurate? If the differences changes the gospel, if it changes core Christian teachings then absolutely we need to figure this out. But if they don't... then why are we being so dogmatic over it?
The only things in question are minor changes of wording, and do not change any significant Christian doctrine.
@onfire247 Thank you for that resource! I definitely will be looking into that. Thanks :)
Personal experience leads me to doubting that it is easier to understand... :D
Years ago my dad (again, KJV Only) got my son a Bible. KJV of course. It was his new Bible so we decided to encourage its use by all using KJV. Some of it is easy, but then there is a lot that is way more difficult to understand. And if I need to go look up definitions of words every time I read the Bible, then that isn't really helping encourage anyone to read the Bible or to grow in the Lord. You take what should be easy and make it difficult.
Plus, the thing with languages changing, is that some of the words we *think* we know, because we use those words today, but then the entire meaning of the passage has been changed, because we are reading into the verse our own meaning of that word instead of the original meaning, and we will never know unless we start dictionary searching every verse we read to make sure we are not in error.
That's cool that it helped you grow closer to God. Keep using it. But you can't say that it will help everyone. My relationship with God is growing closer by me meditating on the Word of God and reading it often with prayer.
Anyway, that is all anecdotal evidence. To a question I think should be at the heart of this. What theologically is changed between KJV and others? You said the trinity? I'm pretty sure the trinity is still taught in my ESV Bible... :P
I guess the real question in all of this discussion… why does it matter? Theologically, doctrinally, what really changes between reading the KJV vs a modern translation?
Other than the fact that the KJV is much more difficult to understand because it uses a 400 year old version of English that nobody today speaks.
The Bible does not change, but our language does, so we need a Bible that is understandable today, that teaches God’s Word in its entirety today.
Ask this arguing over how we are only allowed to use one version of the Bible that is difficult to read… stop getting in the way of people reading and understanding God’s word.
As long as we don't get angry and start tearing each other down, then the discussion is good and healthy. But sometimes things can get more fired up than what is safe. More heat than light, I think I saw someone say earlier.
onfire247 Thank You, sincerely, for taking the time to share this. I know that many online arguments between two people never produce the fruit we intend it to (to convince the other person we're talking to of the validity of our points), however, there is a lot of fruit that can be gained by those watching the conversation from the sidelines, who may have questions related to the subject but not enough knowledge to ask or research or dive in.
My father is KJV only. We've had friends that are/were KJV only and it's sad to see how they let that one issue break fellowship with friends and family. Sometimes out of sincere belief, and other times out of a desire to be part of the "know it all" club that has special information that others don't. It's sad...
@Jappel, I did not see anything in onfire247's response that would lead to thinking that they believed in the "lost gospels".
The NASB is an excellent translation, for the study of scripture, but not necessarily the easiest for memorization. :D
I went back and forth on ESV or CSB for a while, and really messed up my memorization here because I couldn't decide lol. In the end, while there are many passages that are easier to understand and memorize in CSB, the ESV is used in my church and is a little more on the word-for-word translation scale, so I went with that. And deleted my CSB verses from my history... which ruined my streak :D
I'll just add one comment... If you are worried that we should not be reading and memorizing a "corrupted" version of scripture, then the only version of scripture that you should be reading and memorizing from is the original language.
That's the only perfect one. All other translations are flawed in some form or another. Luckily those flaws are infinitesimal and do not change the meaning of any major or core doctrine of Christianity.
We may or may not disagree there, but as long as you don't say "it is the only valid translation" then we can still have a good time of fellowship together. It's the KJV only individuals that, at least in my experience, tend to really cut out those who read other translations.